We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Warning: JavaScript is required for some functionalities of this page. Please enable the use of JavaScript in your browser. Log In
Register My Account
Log Out (%1$s)

We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.

Warning: JavaScript is required for some functionalities of this page. Please enable the use of JavaScript in your browser.

Fix damage naming convention ("tactical" damage)

Given that we're bracing for a relatively major revamp of all classes, perhaps it's a good time to finally fix damage type naming?

This issue mainly has to do with the "tactical" designation. Currently, "tactical damage" may refer to a tactical source (as opposed to mellee or ranged), or tactical type (as opposed to physical).

This is utterly confusing, and took me quite a bit of time to figure out as a relatively new player. Also, the tactical designation for damage type does not describe the situation very well (not sure what's "tactical" about burning an enemy when whacking him in a big sword).

While it is a relatively trite term in MMOs, "elemental" describes the damage type considerably better (and yes, light and shadow can be considered elements in the Middle Earth).

Thoughts?

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Though I disagree with the "elemental" name, I certainly agree that they should have seperate names.

So /signed.

Maybe Fëarin Damage instead of Tactical source damage? Although I suppose they aren't allowed to use that since it's not mentioned in LotR.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]